Re: [OT] To****ba climbs on 'HD DVD exit'

In article <svqdnXjIsKgLpybanZ2dnUVZ_j2dnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Ned Ludd
<andy.block@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> Gnomus wrote:
> > In article
> > <47bacfec$0$30949$5a62ac22@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Luke
> > Hooft <blank@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > 
> >> Ned Ludd wrote:
> >>
> >>> Oh, I don't know.
> >>>
> >>> The cinema standards are given in vertical lines of resolution,
while TV 
> >>> standards are horizontal.
> >>>
> >>> SDTV is generally considered 720x480, while typical widescreen HD 
> >>> monitors are 1920x1080.
> >>>
> >>> In other words, we're very close to 2K now with a good widescreen
TV.
> >>>
> >>> So 4K is only twice the resolution, four times the number of pixels
per 
> >>> frame.
> >>>
> >>> Doesn't seem a stretch.
> >> Yeah - maybe not for physical panels (1080p looks amazing on a 60
inch 
> >> plasma or lcd but 4 times the resolution just wouldn't be noticable
at 
> >> the distances you're viewing at), but I could see 4k being viable in 
> >> homes with projectors - and of course a 4k projector will eventually
be 
> >> as affordable as a 1080p one is today.
> >>
> >> LH
> > 
> > You guys are all cornucopians.  You think technology is going to march
> > on forever.  There are serious issues in our future with regards to
> > energy, water, raw materials, etc.  The era of cheap oil (and
> > everything that goes with it) is over, and we are entering a time of
> > increased energy demand competing with scarcity.  
> > 
> > The future is going to more Blade Runner than you think.  Only it
isn't
> > going to be raining all the time.
> 
> That's too bad.  Southern California could really use the rain.

Actually, right now we are getting some rain.  Don't know if we're at
or around our yearly average though.  Normal is 31 inches annual; last
year we had 3.

> 
> I'm not that old, but it wasn't that long ago that a single electronics 
> package held one transistor, and that was it.  Now we have hundreds of 
> thousands on a single die.
> 
> (Actually, it wasn't that long ago that we were using tubes for
everything).
> 
> A 60" display needs a couple of sheets of glass with a diagonal 
> somewhere around 65" -- regardless of the number of lines of resolution.
> 
> When CD came out we had something like 650 megabytes on a single plastic

> platter, and Blu-Ray disks at 50 gigabytes are far from the limit.
> 
> Sometimes, advancing technology means doing more with less.

That's the argument with cars and helping the environment:  smaller
cars, more fuel efficient -- the day is saved!  The problem they've
found is that people with fuel efficient cars tend to burn more fuel
than they would have in their old, less efficient cars.  Because
they're being so efficient, you see, they can drive more and more! 
It's called Jevon's Paradox.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox